St. Basil the Blessed
Posted on 12/30/2005 11:40:04 AM PST by NYer
“Several news stories today are reporting on the decision by Comedy Central to pull a scheduled rerun of the ‘Bloody Mary’ episode that was shown on ‘South Park’ on December 7-10. The decision reflects what I asked for in our news release of December 8. Therefore, I commend Comedy Central for finally making the right decision. That it aired in the first place, however, does not speak well for the bigots responsible for creating it.
“In our December 8 news release, I also said, ‘Remember, they chose to insult Our Blessed Mother on the eve of the Immaculate Conception, and the holy day itself.’ The episode in question featured a statue of the Virgin Mary spraying blood from her vagina. It was one of the most vile TV shows ever to appear, and that is why I asked Joseph Califano, a practicing Catholic and member of Viacom’s board of directors (Viacom is the parent company of Comedy Central) to issue a public condemnation of the ‘Bloody Mary’ episode; I also asked that he do whatever he could to pull any scheduled reruns of the episode.
“On December 9, the day Califano received our request, he released a statement condemning the episode. He also said that any further decisions would have to be made by Tom Freston, president and chief executive of the New Viacom. For the past few weeks, we have been in touch with Freston’s office awaiting his decision. Yesterday, we received a phone call from Tony Fox, executive vice president for corporate communications at Comedy Central, informing us that there were no plans to rerun ‘Bloody Mary.’
“Already, we are being deluged with hate mail that is as obscene as it is viciously anti-Catholic. All because we exercised our First Amendment right to request that Comedy Central not offend Catholics again! But we’re used to such things and will not be deterred.”
Nothing amazing about it. It's just HTML.
Allow me to clarify.
You used the biggest font; you are the most excited; and you are amazing.
Every notice that protestants don’t pray to statues and other icons decorating their churches? They choose the other side of the trade off that I described in my last post. It can’t simply be dismissed as akin to admiring “winning lottery tickets”. There’s more than I want to dig through here in STATUES OF SAINTS" GOD ORDAINED OR IDOLATRY? and a more critical piece here.
Like I said, the Church probably supports something bordering idolaty (not statues that drip blood like you said) because it attracts troubled or uneducated converts (not the people you go to church with like you said). But it enables crowds rushing to fluid drippin icons like these that are fodder for South Park. I grew up seeing reports of these at various levels of credibility and crowd appeal. This is one of the more humorous. It’s so much more common in Catholicism because of their promotion of borderline idolatry and miracles. I see here that Pope John Paul II attributes his visitation to the Our Lady of Fatima miracle shrine for his survival of the 1981 an assassination attempt. That’s how it’s supported and enables the behavior that South Park lampoons.
This is not a subject that I’m really interested in. I’m only explaining it because you said that you don’t understand the rationale for criticism of miracle chasers or Catholic’s borderline idolatry, as if it’s something unique to South Park. You won’t agree with it or be persuaded, but that‘s not why I took the time to look it up. I just wanted to help you to understand it.
Regards
So you think an effort that “blasphemed” the essence the Virgin Mary’s “sainthood, -- her virgin womb . That is toughed by a miracle, in fact, by God in the very direct sense.” came from an ideological foundation that’s parallel to yours or benign? So you’re going on like this because the episode was just an unpersuasive fit of meaningless dirty talk?
The South Park episode was not an argument of any intellectual worth. I don't think it was meaningless, but the meaning was to insult rather than to dispute anything. Just like, if instead of posting arguments to you I would begin insluting your mother, then this conversation will lose all value and become a nuisance to you.
I’m pretty sure the episode's meaning was to challenge the idea that alcoholism is a disease that can’t be controled through self discipline, and they made a pretty good argument for it considering the media. The silliness of pilgrimages to fluid dripping statues was just approached as self evident, and then exaggerated in South Park style as a tool for developing the meaning of the episode.
No need to wonder how it would effect me if they slammed something “sacred” like my Mother. As an Objectivist for 15 years now, I was spun around in 1998 when they said “Atlas Shrugged” was “garbage” that “totally sucked a~s”. Guess which one of these guys is me. I wonder if I could get anyone who says that banned for blasphemy.
I am sure the episode had something other than insults attached to the blasphemy of the Virgin Mary, but the Virgin Mary theme itself could only detract from the other topics.
Ayn Rand is your mother and is holy?
That’s like asking if a plaster Virgin Mary best expresses your integrated philosophical foundation including morality and politics. If not, I think the offence to me would be greater if I thought the SP moment had enough truth in it to be offensive, wanted to build up its symbolism and focus on my victimization.
Spicing up an episode with multiple irreverent absurdities is integral to SP's appeal for many, perhaps for a similar group that’s potentially attracted to Catholicism by miracles from fluid dripping status. SP lampoons questionable aspects of Catholic methods, but you want to outlaw theirs.
A Statue of Virgin Mary is not the entire expression of Catholicism, but it is important. as she is the high point of purely human acheivement, to which a Catholic is called to strive.
As to South Park appeal, pornography is even more appealing, but it does not make it valuable or justifies its political legality.
Unfortunately, the complaint is discredited by its association with a the professionally offended Bill Donohue, a man who could find anti-Catholic bias in sheep entrails.
This just means I will have to buy the DVD set.
Outlawing, not legalizing something requires justification.
You want irreverence toward a common plaster statue of something symbolically important to your ideological ideals made illegal but presumably don’t support doing the same for equally insulting and irreverent references directly to my ideology.
Well, I only asked if Rand were holy and your mother, in order to qualify for the same level of protection Virgin Mary should have.
I would not be opposed to outlawing any obscene and insulting references done in public to anyone, including Rand or your mother, but don't be surprised if the Catholic League keeps its focus on the matters of Christian religion.
I considered myself a libertarian for a long time, ad so did a lot of arguing for Rand, but never have come accross references to Rand's bodily functions before, by the way.
Like I suggested, her book revealing the integrated philosophical ideals of some should have at least the same level of protection as statues symbolizing a central ideal of others. There’re plenty of references to Rand and bodily functions.
If you’d outlaw insulting public references to anyone in order to prohibit blasphemy, does that include calling Parker and Stone “idiots”?
Idiot is a common expression of being intellectually ill-formed. While it is unpleasant to receive, it is not obscene.
That’s “ignorant”, idiot is more insulting and contemptuous implying notably foolish, stupid or retarded. Probably some would consider it blasphemy if directed at God or the sacred.
You're welcome to keep supplying support for my first post to you of how blasphemy is subjective.
Where do you see blasphemy now?
I don't have anything to add. I wish you happiness for the new year in your faith. Regards.
Incidentally, just in case anyone wonders if canonizing an idiot is blasphemous, this is St. Basil's cathedral dominating the Red Square in Moscow for the past four centuries and a half.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.